Jackson et al v. Mike-Lopez et al

Filing 43

ORDER denying 42 Motion to Appoint Counsel (Written Opinion) Signed by Magistrate Judge Becky R. Thorson on 4/10/2018. (TMM)cc: all pro se plaintiffs. Modified text on 4/10/2018 (MMP).

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Ronnie Jackson; Joshua Jones; Shane Kringen; Marvin Franco-Morales; Mitchell Osterloh; and Jesse Plentyhorse, Plaintiffs, Civ. No. 17-4278 (JRT/BRT) ORDER v. Sharlene Mike-Lopez; Diane Medchill; Kathy Ried; Bruce Rieser; David Rieshus; Tom Roy; and Michelle Smith, Defendants. Plaintiff Shane Kringen has requested appointment of counsel in this matter. See Doc. No. 42. “A pro se litigant has no statutory or constitutional right to have counsel appointed in a civil case.” Stevens v. Redwing, 146 F.3d 538, 546 (8th Cir. 1998); see also In re Lane, 801 F.2d 1040, 1042 (8th Cir. 1986) (“The decision to appoint counsel in civil cases is committed to the discretion of the district court.”). It is not yet apparent that appointment of counsel would benefit either plaintiffs or the Court. Plaintiff complains that he has been denied access to his legal work and does not have the resources to comply with court deadlines. Thus far, the plaintiffs have presented their claims with reasonable clarity. Accordingly, the motion for appointment of counsel will be denied without prejudice. That said, this Court will reconsider the request for counsel sua sponte should future circumstances dictate. Plaintiff also requests waiver of service, but waiver has already been requested by the Clerk’s Office. (See Doc. No. 41.) Therefore, this motion will also be denied without prejudice. ORDER Based on the foregoing, and on all of the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The motion of plaintiff Shane Kingren for appointment of counsel and waiver of service (Doc. No. 42) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. s/ Becky R. Thorson BECKY R. THORSON United States Magistrate Judge Dated: April 10, 2018 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?